In regards to privacy and identification on Steemit

in #steemit4 years ago (edited)

In regards to privacy and identification on Steemit

Let me start by saying my intent for this post is not to 'wow' you with pretty images. So you only get the one.

This post is what I want to refer to as a high-quality opinion piece (my opinion.) It is high-quality based solely on my own personal assessment, yours might be different, but I am ok with that. It might not be a popular opinion among some and I am ok with that as well.

Let's get started ...

Why would most legitimate content creators ID themselves on this platform right now or be forced to?

Reasons why we wouldn't want to:

  • The platform has not performed well overall rewarding legitimate high-quality content from authors/creators. I stress the word "overall" to clarify emphasis by this statement.

  • The socket puppet account issue has been obviously blatant to a lot of people for awhile now.
    How a so called sock puppet account is managed is where my opinion would differ. Being there really are no governing laws on Steemit we probably all tend to lean towards moral, ethics and good faith to form our opinions of what we all personally think the rules should be.

If a sock puppet account is created with the intent of all the proceeds stay within the circle of a sole owner, I find that to be unethical, personally.

But, as an example. Let's say I approach @asuccessfulwhale about partnering up with him/her where either an account is created, or let's say this account of mine now is used to produce high-quality content. The deal is, I produce 1 high-quality article per day on this account (or any agreed upon amount). I receive all SD's earned for the first 2 payouts, the account maintains all SP and any powered down steem which stays within the control of @asuccessfulwhale in this example. Of course in the best interest of both @asuccessfulwhale would use any of his/her accounts setups to upvote the content, as long as it is worthy. If not, a penalty could be included in any agreement made.

In this example, you are partnering up and both leveraging upon each other to benefit both individuals. I imagine he/she had some kind of setup with the examples given in the post.

In this example, I would still highly suggest the account with the voting power utilize upvotes to curate all other high-quality content as well for the benefit of the platform as a whole.

This is called a "business deal."

heck - if any whale is interested in hiring me - [email protected]

  • Still in Beta Phase. I remember when I was one of the very small lucky few who had the honor to beta test "World Of Warcraft" during Alpha stage through the friends and family program Blizzard once had. Oh, how that game evolved over time.

The same will happen here, at least if the founders are serious about making this thing work. In a recent video, it was stated by them that Steemit is "an experiment." This is worrisome for me personally.

  • Some creators prefer privacy / use pen names etc. I love to write in a variety of characters. Some call it a multi-personality disorder. I call it creative writing as I don't act out these different characters in real life, I just write about them.

  • Until Steemit is a "proven" platform why should I or anyone else risk previous works and reputation? If I told you I have articles I wrote for websites like, what difference does that make to the next post I decide to write for Steemit? An article I wrote as an example 2 years ago for website A doesn't translate over to a quality article for a Steemit post today. The real issue is not "who" the author is, it is "does steemit have a gaming the system" issue.

  • Why would a content creator release their top tier work here right now when payouts seem to be a gamble or based on having a solid relationship with accounts with the voting power? For the majority, the payouts are far subpar compared to what you get paid freelancing.

  • Just because you read a metric fuck ton of online articles on how to be a successful blogger by people like Jon Morrow, Pat Flynn or Tim Ferriss (no discredit meant to them) as an example, does not mean every person needs to or wants to "brand" themselves on a personal level. That just is just the current trend. In 5 years a new trend will be the new thing anyway.

  • Until you have been stalked or harassed by some crazy NuckFit because he or she disagreed with an article you wrote 5 years ago, you have no idea how important anonymity might be. The ability to hire security services can surely help in these instances, but why in the world can a person not produce high-quality content on Steemit anonymous and be rewarded for it?

  • What if a content creator is a young, new up and coming creator? They basically have no name at this point. Do you suggest Steemit become an elitist community that won't welcome those who are? I remember exactly who gave me my first writing oppurtunity with a payment attached to it. I am forever grateful and will never forget where I started from.

I could add more, but I think by now I should have made a distinct point.

Until the platform can prove itself to the masses, we shouldn't be asked to prove anything to the platform, including identity. Right now I feel Steemit is more of a playground to test things out to help produce a wonderful platform and community someday.

Demanding a person's identity is just as bad as the everyday government metalling we face every day.

We should be voting on the quality of the content created not by who created it (I am referring to pure original content), minus the thieves, plagiarizer's etc. of course.

Of course, there is some merit in those who have decided to brand themselves and bring that followship with them to various places. But anyone upvoting only based on those premises alone are doing a huge disservice to the success of Steemit.

If you are interested in the post I was referring to that inspired me to write this post, it can be found here.


Fat-Like-Buddha (James)